m3: Fixed screen on a medium format, especially now it's the well-accepted norm to offer waist-level shooting, means this camera began its design phase too long ago and that these designers never took into consideration the true Hasselblad/Rollei tradition by not implementing a swivel screen for this purpose. Shame.

Actually Pentax first made a commercially viable SLR. Pentaprism is their arena. DSLRs use best of both worlds, OVF and back LCD and also possible is EVF overlay. Imagine a car that runs on LPG and petrol and diesel, so you choose what you want? But most folks here only pew-pew on such an idea, and think diesel-only rocks. Go figure ...

Zvonimir Tosic: Why is the talk about photography deliberately dumbed down to a current technology? The future of cooking is "probably the microwave"; now who wants to say that? For what we have seen in the last 150 years is that photography is immune to tech fad and it develops as it goes; nothing is worse than nail it down to the empty talk of advocates of a certain tech.

No, they are only current state of affairs, same as the microwave is the most popular cooking device today. But that does not mean they are the future. That is semantic and logical error of the article, which should rather focus on the purpose camera was designed for, if there is any, explore that rather than on dwell on idle prophecies which are outside the scope of control of Hasselblad. Hasselblad is only the consumer inside the current tech, and has no voting power to change anything.

Around f8 perhaps. MF is the MF; the sensor is too large for very small lenses make any sense. Even with 35mm, there must be some flange distance to make lenses small, optically very good and with decent aperture (2.8).

Zvonimir Tosic: Why is the talk about photography deliberately dumbed down to a current technology? The future of cooking is "probably the microwave"; now who wants to say that? For what we have seen in the last 150 years is that photography is immune to tech fad and it develops as it goes; nothing is worse than nail it down to the empty talk of advocates of a certain tech.

So is the mirrorless tech made for junk photography?The issue is not the Hasselblad in this case, but the DPR, which gives an editorial bias in the chosen headline that is senseless and counterproductive.

Why is the talk about photography deliberately dumbed down to a current technology? The future of cooking is "probably the microwave"; now who wants to say that? For what we have seen in the last 150 years is that photography is immune to tech fad and it develops as it goes; nothing is worse than nail it down to the empty talk of advocates of a certain tech.

Zvonimir Tosic: Looks clean, neat, uncluttered, straightforward, refined software UI, all of which means — definitely non-Japanese. That is such a refreshment in this sorry industry stuck in the same gear for years. Thank God for Leica. And for Hassy coming back to senses. We desperately needed some fresh perspectives.

It is difficult to say that; Leica SL clearly borrows from very early SLR designs, which were popularised by Pentax, and then copied by Olympus, Nikon etc. But Leica had an SLR system, they know how to make them. Even the name SL is from the SLR, with R removed. Leica simplified that very basic SLR design from 1960s to the core, and that is a feat Japanese cannot do for some reason; they can do cluttered digital cameras, or nothing, it seems.

seragram: 1/2000 max shutter and non articulating rear screen like some have said here before about 6D. Are limiting. Specially on camera this expensive.

You have heard of ND filters, have you not? Users who will buy this camera use ND and other filters every day. Camera is designed for its meant purpose, and considering the size of sensor, and overall styling, that is not hi-speed photography.

Looks clean, neat, uncluttered, straightforward, refined software UI, all of which means — definitely non-Japanese. That is such a refreshment in this sorry industry stuck in the same gear for years. Thank God for Leica. And for Hassy coming back to senses. We desperately needed some fresh perspectives.

Anastigmat: Ricoh should put its own brand name on some of the Pentax cameras. It was a pretty well liked brand when it was making Pentax K mount cameras in the past.

If we are to judge numbers, then Ricoh may as well buy and use 'Praktica' brand for low end DSLRs. Or buy Contax, and use that. Or Zenit, which was the eastern European ripoff of Pentax cameras. Any of these were more famous than "Ricoh" in the past.

Incredibly ugly metamorph of a camera, ugly even when considering Marc Newson's unfortunate excursion into the Pentax land. This new camera looks like a cut/copy/paste mishmash of all the models in the last 5 years. Is this mutilation so necessary, when the user reports never ceased to praise the K5II design? Why not stick to one proven design and change the parts inside? Leica does it, even Nikon and Canon with their top bodies. So one can look at it and say, "Ah, it's a proven Pentax DSLR", and not confuse it with a latest cheapo Sony or whatever.Do human hands and anatomy change every season so radically, or the marketing manager has run out of ideas how to sell a new model?

Frankinidaho: The spelling errors seem to be corrected at the teaser site. What are we going to talk about now? ;)

About how Pentax users are more passionate and know more about what to expect, than what Ricoh is able to show? Ricoh seems to be confused party, new to the game; they supposedly serve as marketing and planning, but in fact obscure the communication and their planning leaves much to be desired. Carelessness like this did not exist when Pentax was Pentax, and when it was Asahi. Their ads and PR, at that time, were stellar. But since Ricoh came, they can't spell SLR but SRL, can't spell Gallery but Gallary, can't even write Pentax but Petnax, then introduce a zillion confusing new terms no one has ever heard before and which mean nothing ... During a major new product release, they choose to show major PR and planning incompetence.

Michael H: A modest upgrade from the existing lens. Differences include:-10g heavier;-one more diaphragm blade;-a few changes to the external design of the lens (looks more like the 50mm); and-different coatings on the glass.

Overall not much difference. Perhaps tests will reveal better optics.

Unfortunately, seems to be correct. Instead of reissuing same lens with extra blade or coating, which is noble, Ricoh could release a new lens perhaps with it, and REALLY make some news?

A little bit of honesty in this lame industry would kill everyone, I presume. Therefore everyone lies, to keep all players in count, an illusion of hard work, dedication, vision and happiness that borders — when you read all those PRs — with hysterical.

As someone noted, it is true that Samsung NX-1 is made very uncompromisingly — finally! (And now rumours that Samsung is getting out of camera business). But do take a look at NX-1: APS-C mount, and that camera is big by mirrorless standards, rivals DSLRs. And there is no way to avoid it, if things are done properly: mirrorless camera will be of same size or be bigger than a DSLR, because mirrorless has some issues to solve DSLR does not have: two of them are heat dissipation and constant current consumption to feed the viewfinder and lens motors.

Can someone unbiased and motivated, explore, and write an article about this: what will be the TRUE size of a mirrorless camera (system) if designed PROPERLY, no cheating, no cutting corners on issues of (A) heat dissipation, (B) great battery life, (C) decent grip, (D) premium materials used (aluminium, magnesium etc.), and (E) 100% image tele-centricity.